Ce corps qui s’appelait et qui s’appelle encore le saint empire romain n’était en aucune manière ni saint, ni romain, ni empire.

“This body which called itself and which still calls itself the Holy Roman Empire was in no way holy, nor Roman, nor an empire.”
— Wikiquote

A European history teacher spends four paragraphs exposing the genuine truth of Voltaire’s pithiness.
https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/sentence-voltaire-state-that-holy-roman-empire-465633

An Oxford historian spends over half a thousand pages to detail the one-thousand year history of the Empire too few know: Peter Wilson’s “The Holy Roman Empire: A Thousand Years of Europe’s History”
REVIEW here
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/central-european-history/article/an-empire-for-our-times-a-discussion-of-peter-wilsons-the-holy-roman-empire-a-thousand-years-of-europes-history/AF57BD06F7F31E78A622F4BB25FC1CE1

OPENING LINES:
“The two centuries since its dissolution in 1806, the Holy Roman Empire has usually been viewed as an antiquated relic of the medieval past, a dysfunctional polity that hindered Germany’s development into a modern, liberal nation-state. In the wake of its demise, a chorus of famous intellectuals and statesmen—including Voltaire, James Madison, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Leopold von Ranke, and Heinrich von Treitschke—derided the Empire as a ‘monstrosity’ hampered by outmoded institutions and backward policies.”

The review explains that Peter Wilson’s mission is to reverse this long settled judgement almost entirely. And in fact to argue that post-war Europe’s economic and later political integration in the European Union — for good or bad — SURPRISE! fallows the lines of precedent set by the Holy Roman Empire.

It’s a tome from 7 years ago in my reading que. From other things I’ve read in the last two decades, I believe that I’ll find Wilson’s estimate more correct — even though, I too, grew up with Voltaire’s excellent and mirthful version of the past.

Fun stuff.

PS huxley. I am amused. Maybe a search on the frog will work?

TJ:

Long ago I read an article of that title, which was accompanied by a clever drawing of a giant frog the size of a building with many windows. I’m sure its explanation was in line with your summary.

Unfortunately all my brain remembered was the bright shiny object, i.e. the giant frog. Hmm…so defenestration has something to do with frogs.

I got straightened out post-9-11, when I discovered Muslims were defenestrating incautious scholars investigating heretical theories of Islam’s origin.

It is. And one ought to have learned it from Western Civ, or else a course on Modern Europe (ie, since the Middle Ages). And the reason it was important and continues to be important is because the singular event of 1618 (neglecting previous 15thC defenestrations) termed “THE defenestration of Prague” concerns the Early Modern struggle through the Wars of Religion to arrive at a workable “freedom of conscience” regarding religious belief.

It is precisely this issue that will be argued and fought over from now until at least the next Presidential election.

What happened was simple, in the context of the Protestant Revolt, sparked by Martin Luther at Worms just over 500 years ago.

The Aristocratic leaders of Protestant Bavaria had gained a Bill of Majesty to sanction Protestant version of Christianity in that land. They met with Catholic Habsburg leaders, however, imbued with the New fervour from Rome, the Counter-Reformation.

And because this meeting occurred in the Holy Roman Empire (mostly just the Habsburg Empire) they met in Prague, fairly central for both sides.

After both sides had made statements, the Catholic side was accused of wishing to void the Bill of Majesty and thus Protestantism in Baveria! Thereupon, three Catholic leaders were forcibly tossed from a third floor window to the ground!

Surprisingly, the three survived! Catholics subsequently ascribed their luck to God’s beneficent Will. Later, Protestants returned the favor saying that they were saved by a dung heap! (Albeit, without facts supporting the…um, smear.

Now, does this sound at all like today’s politics? It does, indeed.

After this, Protestant forces stirred, and Catholic forces for war gathered. This event resulted in the Thirty Years War.

The Biblical significance (pace roofers in huxley’s contrasting example) comes from the story of Jezebel and her fall from high to low, and thus a Fall from Grace. The parallels of the Righteous humiliating of the sinner in Christendom and the Koranic practice of beheading Infidels throat gutting or beheading, should be noticed.

Therefore, the defenestration of Prague’s deep religious and symbolic significance. The assault was intended as a deeper, spiritual insult. And this is a meaning now lost in our Modern Age of Ignorance, sadly.

Today, we take for granted our freedom of conscience and belief. Yet this is precisely what’s at stake in Georgia’s Fulton County assault on Team Trump. If we cannot agree to disagree about election outcomes, then we’re back to the defenestration of rival leaders.

There’s nothing new under the Sun.

A SHORT HISTORY of the Defenestration of Prague
https://allthatsinteresting.com/defenestration

Wikipedia’s longer and turgid “Defenestrations of Prague.”
(The plural use is preferred by the historically well-read — similar acts, same city!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defenestrations_of_Prague

You spend a lot of effort proselytizing, Could be worse, could be the flat earth, Oh well,

Thus, fenêtre –> fenestre –> défenestrer –> defenestrate

Thank god, I’m learning French and not some distant language.

chazzard:

For a long time I assumed defenestration was some deviant practice that I didn’t want to know about.

Then I learned that it meant being thrown out of a window. It still seemed like a strange, surprisingly specific word. I don’t think there is a word for being thrown off, say, a roof.

Now that I knows some French, I can spot fenêtre for window right off the bat, and voilà, the French have a verb: défenestrer.